If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I confessed on this board years ago, that I am not a science guy. I am just a reloader with 50 years of experience with 2400 powder, both the Hercules and Alliant versions. When folks start to throw around data, charts, waves etc. I just drop out.

I will say there is nothing in my experience that validates what the fellow says about 2400 as true. Maybe I have had my head up my wazoo for the last half century, but I am calling BS on this guys powder punditry.

Disclaimer: The above is not holy writ. It is just my opinion based on my experience and knowledge. Your mileage may vary.

We accumulate our opinions at an age when our understanding is at its weakest. Georg C. Lichtenberg

At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, If it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us; it cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time, or die by suicide. A. Lincoln

Some real-world shooting conditions require more aggressive initiation than provided by standard primers. Large cases, cold weather, and certain propellants often require a hotter primer flame and a longer burn. CCI Magnum primers offer you that edge, plus you get all the attributes that make all CCI primers so great.

I'll add my two cents. I have compared Hercules 2400 to Alliant 2400 as well and found them very similar when tested in the 357Mag and 30-06. This was based upon chrony results. Accuracy-wise I find that the Alliant has a slight edge and think that has to do with ignition.

I find that Alliant 2400 has a certain percentage of uncoated (no graphite) grains which helps ignition but doesn't really change the overall burning rate.

What I find with 2400 is that below a certain point (pressure-wise) 2400 does burn inefficiently and gives lower than expect velocities. If you are working up a load from lower levels to higher levels you might experience this jump but once it is burning efficiently I find it is linear. Almost like there are two burning rates. There may also be a non-linear portion at higher pressures but I never went there to find out.

I have a Hercules pamphlet from the 1930's showing load data & pressure for a number for rifle cartridge loaded exclusively with 2400 and a quick perusal thru that show some very linear behavior.

After burning many jugs of 2400 I have develop the opinion that 2400 is a very stable & dependable powder and I'll end by asking rhetorically what does this gentleman think about BlueDot powder?

Sounds like a load of **** to me too.. I have used 2400 for over 40 years. .38 spcl, 357 mag, 44 mag and special. Numerous cast rifle loads. 30-30, 308, 30-06. I like it because you can download it, not super temperature or position sensitive. Burns clean, ignites well with a large pistol primer in most cases, and the accuracy is very good.
Its a great all around powder.

vzerone. That what CCI told me a few years ago when I was having problems with primers piercing. I asked them why they don't tell people about this. They said it is not a problem for 90% of the people they sell primers to. And that the primers were made for the Hornet. I switched to the mags and they never pierced again.

I go with Mr. Gibson on what he had tested. Also I have used for all my use and on the 410 al.so and cast and yes i use both H2400 and A2400 at one point in my test ammo and seen no different.Mr. Gibson show that and I go with that

vzerone. That what CCI told me a few years ago when I was having problems with primers piercing. I asked them why they don't tell people about this. They said it is not a problem for 90% of the people they sell primers to. And that the primers were made for the Hornet. I switched to the mags and they never pierced again.

Tomme I don't like CCI primers. I've just recently have had problems with them, but it's a problem of them not going off on the first strike. I've had to resort to cleaning the primer pockets spotless and seating the primers firmly. That helped some, but didn't solve the problem totally. I bought them during the big buying spree or normally wouldn't have bought that brand. They were all that were available.

yup ive used it for over 40 years now. Ive lit it off with every primer made. Ill say it probably does a bit better on average with a standard primer over a mag but its not an across the board statement. Some loads do better and some do worse. Ive shot it in temps from 10 below zero to a 100 degrees and never noticed and temp problems with it. Any powder will produce slighty higher pressures in hot weather. 2400 isn't any worse then the rest of them. 4227 for an example is much more temp sensitive then 2400. As are 110/296 and aa9. bottom line is if I could have only two powders for all my handgun loading they would be unique and 2400. Id like something a bit faster for the little cases like the 9mm but unique would get it done and on the tope end 2400 will get you to 95 percent of the hottest possible loads in any magnum. Do it with less powder then the others and do it with any primer and is a MUCH better powder to download then any of those ball powders

Soldier of God, sixgun junky, Retired electrical lineman. My office was a 100 feet in the air, closer to God the better

I have used H2400 and A2400 for years in 357 as well as 30-30,30-06, 8MM, and a lot of others. My goto load in 357 is 12.5 gr. under a 158gr.swc. 25 grains under the Lee 405fn in 45-70.
I call bs on the info in the original post. His opinion and it stinks.

Tennessee Hunter Education Instructor

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to
restrain the people; it is an instrument for the
people to restrain the government-lest it come to
dominate our lives and interests"
Patrick Henry

I would not agree with the "ex-spurt" . I've used a lot of 2400 from Hercules and Alliant in several different cartridges . Recently was gifted a large can of the Hercules variety from a long time ago . It worked as well as what you get off the shelf today .

Tomme I don't like CCI primers. I've just recently have had problems with them, but it's a problem of them not going off on the first strike. I've had to resort to cleaning the primer pockets spotless and seating the primers firmly. That helped some, but didn't solve the problem totally. I bought them during the big buying spree or normally wouldn't have bought that brand. They were all that were available.

Jimmy Mitchell (gunsmith from Breckenridge, TX) was at an Area 2 USPSA match a few years ago and we had a conversation about primers not feeding well in my Dillon 650. He convinced me to try CCI primers. I did and they fed more smoothly than any brand I had used- Federal, Winchester and Remington. I had been crushing about 2 out of every 100 on average until going to CCI. I shoot a .40 S&W STI in USPSA matches. I load the brass until it cracks and have never cleaned a primer pocket in that cartridge. I have had exactly no misfires with CCI or any other brand in that cartridge. In fact, the only misfires I have had were in my Colt Trooper MK III after installing lightweight Bullseye springs. It would only ignite Federal primers 100% with the Bullseye mainspring. I switched to a Wolff mainspring that was between the power of the Bullseye and a factory spring and it has been good with any brand of primer. Back to the subject, with a factory level mainspring in my STI Edge (it does get replaced every few years) I have had 100% ignition over 90,000 rounds, about half of which were with CCI primers and uncleaned primer pockets.

Sometimes life taps you on the shoulder and reminds you it's a one way street. Jim Morris

Jimmy Mitchell (gunsmith from Breckenridge, TX) was at an Area 2 USPSA match a few years ago and we had a conversation about primers not feeding well in my Dillon 650. He convinced me to try CCI primers. I did and they fed more smoothly than any brand I had used- Federal, Winchester and Remington. I had been crushing about 2 out of every 100 on average until going to CCI. I shoot a .40 S&W STI in USPSA matches. I load the brass until it cracks and have never cleaned a primer pocket in that cartridge. I have had exactly no misfires with CCI or any other brand in that cartridge. In fact, the only misfires I have had were in my Colt Trooper MK III after installing lightweight Bullseye springs. It would only ignite Federal primers 100% with the Bullseye mainspring. I switched to a Wolff mainspring that was between the power of the Bullseye and a factory spring and it has been good with any brand of primer. Back to the subject, with a factory level mainspring in my STI Edge (it does get replaced every few years) I have had 100% ignition over 90,000 rounds, about half of which were with CCI primers and uncleaned primer pockets.

You bring up some interesting notes. Ironically I only have feed problems with CCI is my RCBS hand primer. All other brands feed perfect. Also too I have lot of no first strike fires with dirty primer pockets with CCI but not other brands. Talking to the CCI technician he told me it crucial that the primer pocket is clean. After starting to clean them more often the failures dropped, but didn't totally go away.

2400 was used extensively by Elmer Keith and Skeeter Skelton.If it was good enough for these two gentlemen,it is good for anybody else I guess.Now if that ''expert'' will pit his reputation up against that of these two,I don't think that he'll come out on top.I'll keep using 2400 and sleep tight at night.

One would think that if 2400 in either company's production was that unstable they would have been sued out of business long ago. The "expert" doesn't happen to work behind the counter of a sporting good's store does he?